Nationalism in the 20th century can be divided into two categories: "Civic nationalism" (
Former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic has been moved to the UN War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague to be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Milosevic, who first strutted onto the political stage in 1986 touting a radical version of Serbian racial nationalism, has directly or indirectly led ethnic cleansing in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. We may feel that it serves him right to be in jail, but we would be naive to believe that imprisoning Milosevic will eliminate racial nationalism.
First of all, it is not only Serbs who are waiting to be tried by the tribunal. Croatian soldiers have also been convicted for the same crimes. Neither in Croatia nor in Kosovo have Serbs been accorded the freedoms that go along with civic nationalism. The tragedy of revenge will repeat itself over and over again.
Second, as far as Milosevic's Bosnian Muslim and Kosovo-Albanian victims are concerned, the arrest of Milosevic is justice delayed. While some have paid the ultimate price, by stepping in and holding the trial, the international community will only serve to let off some steam. Over half the population has fled from these areas and thousands have been raped, mistreated or killed. If local leaders had taken the welfare of the people into consideration from the beginning and not so easily fallen into the trap of ethnic clashes deliberately set by Milosevic, the people's suffering may have have been less tragic.
Judging from Milosevic and Eastern Europe, it looks as though the people of Taiwan should renounce ideas of racial nationalism and recognize the broadly accepted values latent in civic nationalism. At a press conference in the US, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) emphasized "eating Taiwanese rice, drinking Taiwanese water and not saying anything else (other than speaking up for Taiwan)." I'll let the reader decide whether this violates the principle of civic nationalism. Identification with China and identification with Taiwan coexist in this nation. Hastily denying values with which others identify will only deepen the feeling that different ethnic groups have of being exploited.
Further, in a situation in which nationalism in China is awakening, Taiwan should avoid a direct nationalist confrontation. Recently, Chinese scholars visiting Taiwan said that it would be difficult to make China accept the Taiwan government's idea that we only want peace and not unification. Given this, it would be valuable for the government to reconsider Formosa Plastics Group chairman Wang Yung-ching's (王永慶) idea of "one equal China" (平等一中) and KMT chairman Lien Chan's (連戰) advocacy of a confederation.
To summarize, sentencing Milosevic does not mean that racial nationalism will disappear. The French scholar Ernest Renan, in his essay What is a Nation?, pointed out that forced national identification is not acceptable. "Maybe 20 people will say to one man: `Accept our definition of a nation, because we are in a majority.' He replies `No way! I have a sword here in my hand, I think that you should be the ones accepting mine.'" Using culture and tradition to gradually dissolve the differences over national identification would be a more stable and healthier method.
Hu Tsu-ching is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science, Tunghai University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath